But, for the vast majority, mouse, you're right. We care about our kids more than even life itself, and we want them to do well. To do better than ourselves, even, everywhere it is possible. And so we put a lot of care and effort into doing right by them. And, from what I've seen, most of the time, it really does work out. Sure, we screw up and make mistakes--big ones, even--but what we get right tends to outweigh what we get wrong. The fact that society continues is proof enough of that._________________I am only a somewhat arbitrary sequence of raised and lowered voltages to which your mind insists upon assigning meaning

Someone like that literally doesn't have the time to sit down with their kids and have a talk about sex, when they are barely financially surviving.

"Don't have sex" is short, simple, and to the point.

mouse wrote:

that they would talk to them just in general, thus building a supportive home atmosphere.

i'm guessing you didn't read past the birds and the bees, so i'm repeating it. so blue collar workers are so busy they never even interact with their kids? _every_ interaction a parent has with a child has an impact on the relationship. which in turn determines whether or not a child will talk to the parent when they have a serious problem.

but if they don't have time to just plain talk, then clearly they don't have time to actually .... what did you say? have the freedom to influence their child's decision? when will they even have time to sign (or even refuse to sign) the consent form?

(because clearly you really want them to sign the form, what with the earth about to collapse under the weight of the human population.)_________________aka: neverscared!
a flux of vibrant matter

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 4:32 pm Post subject: Re: And you probably won't even think you are in one by then

Thy Brilliance wrote:

It is not as if your freedom of expression will be taken away. It would in fact be encouraged.

What makes you think this? In which totalitarian regime has freedom of expression flourished more than it does in modern democracies?

Thy Brilliance wrote:

There would be little need for excessive force when the populace is entirely dependent on all the fascinating new technologies keeping them entertained and occupied.

What makes you think this? In which totalitarian regime has there been less excessive force used on the populace than in modern democracies?

Thy Brilliance wrote:

If those in power have learned anything from the past centuries of existence, they would at least understand where others have failed.

What makes you think this is a good thing? Why would it be an improvement that the next generation of oppressive regimes will last longer than previous oppressive regimes?_________________"To love deeply in one direction makes us more loving in all others."
- Anne-Sophie Swetchine

As is such, we must eventually take measures to control population growth.

Examples of such measures are: You aren't allowed to have children until you have passed a full psychological evaluation, financially stable job, etc etc.

This is to ensure dysfunctional families won't be created.

Also, eugenics? Really? WTF is wrong with you?

Well, I certainly don't want to sound as if I support eugenics. And the idea that I might have common ground with Thy is even scarier than that! But, I have on more than one occasion thought it wouldn't be a bad idea if prospective parents were required to prove their competence before they could raise children.

How?

I have no freaking clue. It's a nice pipe-dream, though..._________________I am only a somewhat arbitrary sequence of raised and lowered voltages to which your mind insists upon assigning meaning

i often think it would be nice if people had to past some sort of test before they have children. but see, there's a problem - having sex and children is a pretty firm biological drive. how are you going to stop people from having children? forced abortions and sterilizations? that's working _so_ well in china.

and of course, the problem here (here=u.s.) is that people who recognize that they can't handle being parents, who know they can't support a child, who know they are too young to have a child are still forced to have them because they can't get an abortion. or birth control, without either jumping through hoops or paying through the nose.

so thy, to get us back to the original subject - how do informed consent laws help solve the problems of a) parents who don't have time to talk to their kids and b) overpopulation? and if they don't solve existing problems, how does it help matters to create more problems (i.e., abuse of pregnant girls by the parents who didn't have time to talk to them in the first place)?_________________aka: neverscared!
a flux of vibrant matter

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 4:59 pm Post subject: Re: And you probably won't even think you are in one by then

Thy Brilliance wrote:

Feiticeira wrote:

Thy Brilliance wrote:

Everytime Option A comes up in history it has a habit of lasting much longer than the last time it came up.

Eventually, people are going to get so good at it, it'll last forever.

That's exactly why it's terrifying and to be resisted. Can you explain why you're so eager to embrace it?

There would be little need for excessive force when the populace is entirely dependent on all the fascinating new technologies keeping them entertained and occupied.

Woah woah woah, so now we've gone from 1984 to Brave New World?

Thy Brilliance wrote:

You are aware that outside forces were necessary to end those regimes, right?

Had they won the war, they very well could have lasted forever.

If Germany had won the war, or at least signed a peace treaty, they would have promptly fallen into collapse. Hitler was vastly outspending Germany's GDP on military equipment that was rapidly going obsolete, wasn't paying his creditors, and had increasing unemployment (which was shown as decreasing, because Hitler promptly removed women and jews from the unemployment statistics). So tell me more about how a country that, in the space of 4 years or so, had spent 101 Billion reichsmarks while having a total gross domestic product totaling 62 Billion reichsmarks, not to mention later propping up business using forced labor to increase the GDP.

Same thing for the Soviets. As long as a usable currency exists, debt will always be snapping at the heels of the dictatorships.

Not to mention, who are you to say that internal resistance would not have ended the Third Reich? I suggest you look up the Arab Spring; it's a pretty good demonstration of the fact that people will only take so much abuse before they snap and tell you to fuck off._________________Whatever happened to the heroes?

i often think it would be nice if people had to past some sort of test before they have children. but see, there's a problem - having sex and children is a pretty firm biological drive. how are you going to stop people from having children? forced abortions and sterilizations? that's working _so_ well in china.

You get paid "x amount" every year you don't have a child.

Tax benefits.

Bam, problem solved capitalistically.

mouse wrote:

so thy, to get us back to the original subject - how do informed consent laws help solve the problems of a) parents who don't have time to talk to their kids and b) overpopulation? and if they don't solve existing problems, how does it help matters to create more problems (i.e., abuse of pregnant girls by the parents who didn't have time to talk to them in the first place)?

TEXT MESSAGE FROM CLINIC:
"YOUR SON OR DAUGHTER IS CONSIDERING AN ABORTION, DO YOU APPROVE?

PLEASE NOTE THAT WE WILL BE CHECKING FOR ANY PSYCHOLOGICAL OR PHYSICAL DAMAGE DONE TO THIS YOUNG WOMAN DURING THE DURATION OF OUR CARE

talking to your kids about sex is ... what, equal to/worse than/in place of putting a tracking device on them?

What dogen suggested is about as unrealistic as putting a tracking device on your child.

In what world does he live in where a parent will actually do the things he suggested, instead of saying: "No shirt, no service, no sex."

Hmm. Prejudiced? My mom worked 60 hour weeks as a bank teller while raising three kids alone. She still found the time to talk to all of us about important issues. It's not like working class people naturally ignore their children. They can also be involved parents, and suggesting they aren't is both ignorant and demeaning. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: go fuck yourself._________________"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman

Everytime Option A comes up in history it has a habit of lasting much longer than the last time it came up.

Eventually, people are going to get so good at it, it'll last forever.

That's exactly why it's terrifying and to be resisted. Can you explain why you're so eager to embrace it?

There would be little need for excessive force when the populace is entirely dependent on all the fascinating new technologies keeping them entertained and occupied.

Woah woah woah, so now we've gone from 1984 to Brave New World?

Thy Brilliance wrote:

You are aware that outside forces were necessary to end those regimes, right?

Had they won the war, they very well could have lasted forever.

If Germany had won the war, or at least signed a peace treaty, they would have promptly fallen into collapse. Hitler was vastly outspending Germany's GDP on military equipment that was rapidly going obsolete, wasn't paying his creditors, and had increasing unemployment (which was shown as decreasing, because Hitler promptly removed women and jews from the unemployment statistics). So tell me more about how a country that, in the space of 4 years or so, had spent 101 Billion reichsmarks while having a total gross domestic product totaling 62 Billion reichsmarks, not to mention later propping up business using forced labor to increase the GDP.

Same thing for the Soviets. As long as a usable currency exists, debt will always be snapping at the heels of the dictatorships.

Not to mention, who are you to say that internal resistance would not have ended the Third Reich? I suggest you look up the Arab Spring; it's a pretty good demonstration of the fact that people will only take so much abuse before they snap and tell you to fuck off.

If Hitler won the war, factories would have sprung up all over Europe specifically for the goal of stimulating Germany's economy and grabbing more resources.

It's one thing to know history, and quite another thing to understand reality.

Oh shit, did you just say "understand reality" in some unironic way?_________________"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman

talking to your kids about sex is ... what, equal to/worse than/in place of putting a tracking device on them?

What dogen suggested is about as unrealistic as putting a tracking device on your child.

In what world does he live in where a parent will actually do the things he suggested, instead of saying: "No shirt, no service, no sex."

Hmm. Prejudiced? My mom worked 60 hour weeks as a bank teller while raising three kids alone. She still found the time to talk to all of us about important issues. It's not like working class people naturally ignore their children. They can also be involved parents, and suggesting they aren't is both ignorant and demeaning. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: go fuck yourself.